400GB Hard Drive for $110!

2006-06-26 06:41:48

#1

claydawg: Chuck Norris' Homeboy; +85|6920|Oxford, MS

http://shop3.outpost.com/product/459628 … IN_RSLT_PG
400GB Seagate PATA Hard Drive with free shipping. Oh yeah, it's got a 16MB cache too! Where else can you get a deal like this? I'm sure some of you may want to jump on this, I just got one myself. I can't take credit for finding the deal, however. The link is compliments of digg.com.

2006-06-26 07:10:22

#2

BlackLegion42: Damn Command and Conquer Generals...; +62|7027|Rochester, NY

Its good for the storage and it is a seagate but it is PATA, using the old Parallel port, not Serial. But since you just want the storage and cache and not as a primary drive, than that is a good deal.

2006-06-26 07:12:47

#3

Nabraham: EWWW!!! Thats Nasty!!!; +18|6981|Enon

Like Blacklegion said, good for storage, using PATA instead of SATA will be its downfall for some, good find though.

2006-06-26 07:16:44

#4

claydawg: Chuck Norris' Homeboy; +85|6920|Oxford, MS

Yeah, I wouldn't recommend installing windows or running BF2 on it. I just want it for my file server.

2006-06-26 07:39:15

#5

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7013

good for second drive though

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2006-06-26 07:43:43

#6

Psycho: Member since 2005; +44|7073|Kansas, USA

You all do realize that PATA drives are just as fast as their SATA cousins, right? it is only the interface that has gotten faster with SATA. The only real benefit of SATA at this time is the fact that you can't have two drives on the same channel.

2006-06-26 07:49:47

#7

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7013

Psycho wrote:
You all do realize that PATA drives are just as fast as their SATA cousins, right? it is only the interface that has gotten faster with SATA. The only real benefit of SATA at this time is the fact that you can't have two drives on the same channel.

SATA is faster than PATA... and i dont really fancy large ribbon cables in my case

2006-06-26 07:51:36

#8

Snipedya14: Dont tread on me; +77|6992|Mountains of West Virginia

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Psycho wrote:
You all do realize that PATA drives are just as fast as their SATA cousins, right? it is only the interface that has gotten faster with SATA. The only real benefit of SATA at this time is the fact that you can't have two drives on the same channel.
SATA is faster than PATA... and i dont really fancy large ribbon cables in my case

The Interface is faster, yes. But the drive itself cant actually use all of the bandwith provided. The only reason SATA may be faster in bechmarks is because of other features (NCQ etc.)

2006-06-26 07:55:16

#9

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7013

Snipedya14 wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Psycho wrote:
You all do realize that PATA drives are just as fast as their SATA cousins, right? it is only the interface that has gotten faster with SATA. The only real benefit of SATA at this time is the fact that you can't have two drives on the same channel.
SATA is faster than PATA... and i dont really fancy large ribbon cables in my case
The Interface is faster, yes. But the drive itself cant actually use all of the bandwith provided. The only reason SATA may be faster in bechmarks is because of other features (NCQ etc.)

and that is why its faster

2006-06-26 08:31:39

#10

-r3-anubis: Member; +73|6834|florida

go to newegg, its better there.

2006-06-26 09:28:54

#11

Snipedya14: Dont tread on me; +77|6992|Mountains of West Virginia

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Snipedya14 wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

SATA is faster than PATA... and i dont really fancy large ribbon cables in my case
The Interface is faster, yes. But the drive itself cant actually use all of the bandwith provided. The only reason SATA may be faster in bechmarks is because of other features (NCQ etc.)
and that is why its faster

Well SATA drives by themselves do not support NCQ off the bat. 3G or Sata 2 drives are the most common. Trust me, you wouldnt notice a difference.

2006-06-26 10:01:07

#12

Zimmer: Un Moderador; +1,688|7053|Scotland

I never knew you needed so much memory

Although my comp has 300 GB

2006-06-26 12:12:49

#13

slo5oh: Member; +28|6958

They have a seagate 300gb sataII 16mb drive for $89 also. It was on outpost last week, but is instore (Fry's) this week. The instore deal ends today, not sure if the outpost deal is dead or not.

2006-06-26 13:18:27

#14

Psycho: Member since 2005; +44|7073|Kansas, USA

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Snipedya14 wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

SATA is faster than PATA... and i dont really fancy large ribbon cables in my case
The Interface is faster, yes. But the drive itself cant actually use all of the bandwith provided. The only reason SATA may be faster in bechmarks is because of other features (NCQ etc.)
and that is why its faster

Those features are not of any benefit in a typical desktop setup. They are for a network/server environment. Have you ever looked at the benchmarks? You'll see that the PATA version and SATA version of each drive model are right next to each other in performance!

2006-06-26 13:20:41

#15

arson: Member; +99|6934|New York

This and a Raptor would be nice

2006-06-26 16:13:35

#16

_j5689_: Dreads & Bergers; +364|7014|Riva, MD

Will you really use 400GB? I hardly fill up my 107GB and I have a whole bunch of stuff installed.

2006-06-26 16:34:51

#17

Viper007Bond: Moderator Emeritus; +236|7103|Portland, OR, USA

_j5689_ wrote:
Will you really use 400GB? I hardly fill up my 107GB and I have a whole bunch of stuff installed.

It's not games that take up the space, it's music, videos, etc.

I have the SATA version of this drive (got it for free before it officially came out ) and it's nearly full:

(I only have one Raptor, it's just partitioned and the Maxtor is SATA as well, but I've run outta SATA ports on this old motherboard of mine. )

Code:

HDDs:                                    [Used]  [Free]   [Size]
 WD 74GB Raptor [WinXP]           (C:)  22.98GB 26.72GB   49.7GB (NTFS)
 Seagate 400GB File Dump [SATA]   (D:) 370.31GB   2.3GB 372.61GB (NTFS)
 WD 74GB Raptor [Vista]           (E:)   9.98GB  9.56GB  19.53GB (NTFS)
 Maxtor 250GB File Dump [USB 2.0] (F:) 227.18GB  6.57GB 233.76GB (NTFS)
Total:                                 630.45GB 45.15GB  675.6GB

I'm currently saving up to build a fileserver for the network that'll have many, many 300GB hard drives in it (best $/GB drive size).

Oh, and how my 400GB Seagate performs:

https://images.viper007bond.com/computer/hdtach_400gb-seagate.jpg

Compare that to my Raptor (mine is in red, one from HDTach's database is in blue):

https://images.viper007bond.com/computer/hdtach_74gb-raptor.jpg

Last edited by Viper007Bond (2006-06-26 16:37:47)

https://bf3s.com/sigs/044900892044e7fc95e599e832a086ae9bcd7efb.png

2006-06-26 16:39:17

#18

King_County_Downy: shitfaced; +2,791|6894|Seattle

Viper007Bond, That's a lot of porn you got there. Hopefully you're sharing

Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it

2006-06-26 16:42:44

#19

Viper007Bond: Moderator Emeritus; +236|7103|Portland, OR, USA

Haha, most of it is TV shows, movies, HD content, music, etc. I only have 8.4GB of porn.

And I have buddies with well over a terabyte of total storage. What I have isn't really anything special so don't be that impressed.

2006-06-26 17:32:29

#20

_j5689_: Dreads & Bergers; +364|7014|Riva, MD

What does he use his terabyte for? lol

2006-06-26 18:14:14

#21

AveryHawk: Member; +6|6991|Sacramento,CA

Porn!!!!!! Ftw!

2006-06-26 18:24:46

#22

{M5}Sniper3: Typical white person.; +389|7057|San Antonio, Texas

Link not working...

2006-06-26 19:18:50

#23

RookieCAF: Member; +11|6887|Western Massachussets

I hate outpost.com. Newegg or ZipZoomFly FTW! And PATA is fine, SATA is nice, but not appreciably faster in the real world..

Raptors are fast, but they're also 10k RPM instead of 7200..

2006-06-26 21:31:32

#24

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,058|7069|PNW

PATA ribbons tend to block airflow if not properly routed, which, aside from speed, is the reason people tend to favor SATA. I would use a large PATA storage drive for small files only. Otherwise, it would take for-frickin-ever to juggle 1+GB files back and forth.

2006-06-26 21:31:38

#25

Viper007Bond: Moderator Emeritus; +236|7103|Portland, OR, USA

RookieCAF wrote:
And PATA is fine, SATA is nice, but not appreciably faster in the real world..

You can easily max out PATA when you have 2 drives on one cable. That's my biggest beef with it.

BF2S Forums 400GB Hard Drive for $110!

Psycho wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Psycho wrote:

Snipedya14 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Psycho wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Snipedya14 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Snipedya14 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

_j5689_ wrote:

Code:

RookieCAF wrote:

Board footer